I've been looking over the used market for a 85mm 1.4 lens. I've noticed that you can find prices for under a grand for the Nikon 85mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor, but then if you look at Nikon's NEW AF-S Nikkor 85mm F1.4G it's nearly double the cost.
What has changed with Nikons 85mm lens? Why is the new one so much more on price?
The new one has nano coating for reduced glare, its sharper wide open, and color rendition is better. It sports the new build design as well. A lot of users of the original swear by it still though.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
I might slip in a suggestion in favour of the new Sigma 84 1.4. It's slightly less sharp than the Nikon 85 1.4G but it's bokeh is arguably better and it's quite a bit cheaper.
Stealthy Ninja wrote: I might slip in a suggestion in favour of the new Sigma 84 1.4. It's slightly less sharp than the Nikon 85 1.4G but it's bokeh is arguably better and it's quite a bit cheaper.
$1700 (Nikon) vs $900 (Sigma), I'll say! That is a huge difference in price. How many glass elements are in the Sigma vs the Nikon?
Stealthy Ninja wrote: I might slip in a suggestion in favour of the new Sigma 84 1.4. It's slightly less sharp than the Nikon 85 1.4G but it's bokeh is arguably better and it's quite a bit cheaper.
$1700 (Nikon) vs $900 (Sigma), I'll say! That is a huge difference in price. How many glass elements are in the Sigma vs the Nikon?
Sigma:
11 elements in 8 groups
The 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM also contains one Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass element (Sigma's version of ED glass) and a glass mold element to offer excellent correction for all types of aberrations and to ensure superior optical performance.
Nikon: 10 elements in 9 groups (with Nano Crystal Coat)
Apparently it doesn't have any aspherical elements or ED glass. BUT it doesn't suck because of it. AFAIK Nano coating does the same job as ED glass anyway right?! Nope, I just checked, it's to reduce flare, not CA. ED and Aspherical elements reduce CA etc.
Stealthy Ninja wrote: I might slip in a suggestion in favour of the new Sigma 84 1.4. It's slightly less sharp than the Nikon 85 1.4G but it's bokeh is arguably better and it's quite a bit cheaper.
$1700 (Nikon) vs $900 (Sigma), I'll say! That is a huge difference in price. How many glass elements are in the Sigma vs the Nikon?
Sigma:
11 elements in 8 groups
The 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM also contains one Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass element (Sigma's version of ED glass) and a glass mold element to offer excellent correction for all types of aberrations and to ensure superior optical performance.
Nikon: 10 elements in 9 groups (with Nano Crystal Coat)
Apparently it doesn't have any aspherical elements or ED glass. BUT it doesn't suck because of it. AFAIK Nano coating does the same job as ED glass anyway right?! Nope, I just checked, it's to reduce flare, not CA. ED and Aspherical elements reduce CA etc.
So more doesn't mean better? It seems like a really close call, considering the Sigma is nearly have the cost. Would be nice to see side by side images taken with both lenses.
Stealthy Ninja wrote: I might slip in a suggestion in favour of the new Sigma 84 1.4. It's slightly less sharp than the Nikon 85 1.4G but it's bokeh is arguably better and it's quite a bit cheaper.
$1700 (Nikon) vs $900 (Sigma), I'll say! That is a huge difference in price. How many glass elements are in the Sigma vs the Nikon?
Sigma:
11 elements in 8 groups
The 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM also contains one Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass element (Sigma's version of ED glass) and a glass mold element to offer excellent correction for all types of aberrations and to ensure superior optical performance.
Nikon: 10 elements in 9 groups (with Nano Crystal Coat)
Apparently it doesn't have any aspherical elements or ED glass. BUT it doesn't suck because of it. AFAIK Nano coating does the same job as ED glass anyway right?! Nope, I just checked, it's to reduce flare, not CA. ED and Aspherical elements reduce CA etc.
So more doesn't mean better? It seems like a really close call, considering the Sigma is nearly have the cost. Would be nice to see side by side images taken with both lenses.
I remember reading about someone who tried both. He said the Nikon is a bit sharper, but the Sigma is close.
and here are some borrowed (100% crop) samples from those reviews: Sigma:
Nikon:
IMHO both are sharp enough for 1.4. I can't tell enough difference to warrant the price increase (YMMV).
Their summary of the Sigma review is worth noting: We rarely publish uncompromising opinions in our summaries but here it would be difficult not to include one. Providing you own a Nikon or Sony reflex camera I personally don’t see any reason why you should buy any brand-name 1.4/85 lenses. The Sigma is cheaper, better and it comes with a longer guarantee – as simple as that. You must be really very infatuated with “Zeiss” or “Nikkor” magical words to prefer their lenses to the Sigma.
Stealthy Ninja wrote: I might slip in a suggestion in favour of the new Sigma 84 1.4. It's slightly less sharp than the Nikon 85 1.4G but it's bokeh is arguably better and it's quite a bit cheaper.
$1700 (Nikon) vs $900 (Sigma), I'll say! That is a huge difference in price. How many glass elements are in the Sigma vs the Nikon?
Sigma:
11 elements in 8 groups
The 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM also contains one Special Low Dispersion (SLD) glass element (Sigma's version of ED glass) and a glass mold element to offer excellent correction for all types of aberrations and to ensure superior optical performance.
Nikon: 10 elements in 9 groups (with Nano Crystal Coat)
Apparently it doesn't have any aspherical elements or ED glass. BUT it doesn't suck because of it. AFAIK Nano coating does the same job as ED glass anyway right?! Nope, I just checked, it's to reduce flare, not CA. ED and Aspherical elements reduce CA etc.
So more doesn't mean better? It seems like a really close call, considering the Sigma is nearly have the cost. Would be nice to see side by side images taken with both lenses.
I remember reading about someone who tried both. He said the Nikon is a bit sharper, but the Sigma is close.
and here are some borrowed (100% crop) samples from those reviews: Sigma:
Nikon:
IMHO both are sharp enough for 1.4. I can't tell enough difference to warrant the price increase (YMMV).
Their summary of the Sigma review is worth noting: We rarely publish uncompromising opinions in our summaries but here it would be difficult not to include one. Providing you own a Nikon or Sony reflex camera I personally don’t see any reason why you should buy any brand-name 1.4/85 lenses. The Sigma is cheaper, better and it comes with a longer guarantee – as simple as that. You must be really very infatuated with “Zeiss” or “Nikkor” magical words to prefer their lenses to the Sigma.
sigma looks better
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
Looks like the sigma Wins in value-for-price and CA @ 1.4. Another important thing to consider is focusing speed and accuracy. It's important when dealing with that razor thin DOF and Sigma lenses don't have the best track record there.
That said, Sigma is capable of some real gems. I have the Sigma 70mm macro, and it optically out-performs the 100mm Canon Macro I used to have in every way. The only drawback is slower focusing, but I can live with that. I manual focus it anyway.
Yasko wrote: Looks like the sigma Wins in value-for-price and CA @ 1.4. Another important thing to consider is focusing speed and accuracy. It's important when dealing with that razor thin DOF and Sigma lenses don't have the best track record there.
That said, Sigma is capable of some real gems. I have the Sigma 70mm macro, and it optically out-performs the 100mm Canon Macro I used to have in every way. The only drawback is slower focusing, but I can live with that. I manual focus it anyway.
Sigma lenses are usually really accurate AFTER calibration.
That said the 85 1.4 seems (so far) to be better than previous Sigma lenses (50 1.4 for example) when it comes to QQ. With a lower instance of back or front focusing problems.
Yasko wrote: Looks like the sigma Wins in value-for-price and CA @ 1.4. Another important thing to consider is focusing speed and accuracy. It's important when dealing with that razor thin DOF and Sigma lenses don't have the best track record there.
That said, Sigma is capable of some real gems. I have the Sigma 70mm macro, and it optically out-performs the 100mm Canon Macro I used to have in every way. The only drawback is slower focusing, but I can live with that. I manual focus it anyway.
Agreed, their quality control is spotty, but when you get it right, it shines.
When the last candle has been blown out
and the last glass of champagne has been drunk
All that you are left with are the memories and the images-David Cooke.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.
The Canon EOS R50 is one of the newest R-system cameras from Canon. Is it worth your money? Find out all the details you need to know in this comprehensive review.
The Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II is Sony’s flagship mirrorless zoom lens. As such, it’s loaded with features and has a top-shelf build quality that makes it a top pick!
Using leading lines in photography helps improve the composition by drawing viewers in and leading their eye from the foreground to the background. Explore some fine examples of this in this guide!
The Insta360 has one of the best lineups of action cams and 360-degree cameras. With these Insta360 accessories, you can elevate your photography and videography game!
Creating impactful photos of landscapes depends on many factors, not the least of which is your talent behind the lens. This guide explores other elements required for the best product.
The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!
The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV is a micro four thirds camera released in 2020. It’s an entry-level system along with the OM-D E-M5 Mark III. Use this guide to determine which one is best for you!
Blue hour photography might not be as well known as golden hour photography, but it is every bit as good a time to create epic images of landscapes. Learn how in this quick tutorial!
Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.
AFAIK Nano coating does the same job as ED glass anyway right?! Nope, I just checked, it's to reduce flare, not CA. ED and Aspherical elements reduce CA etc. 
It seems like a really close call, considering the Sigma is nearly have the cost. Would be nice to see side by side images taken with both lenses. 
Phyllis Miller 1 post
Sassy Girl 1 post
